| From: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Cc: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Skip partition tuple routing with constant partition key |
| Date: | 2021-05-27 05:53:59 |
| Message-ID: | CA+HiwqF2Mgb_-b1n06WN6tNn78pM3vvNWfVZ6FVR-oxS=8-HKA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 11:47 AM houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com
<houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
> About teaching relcache about caching the target partition.
>
> David-san suggested cache the partidx in PartitionDesc.
> And it will need looping and checking the cached value at each level.
> I was thinking can we cache a partidx list[1, 2 ,3], and then we can follow
> the list to get the last partition and do the partition CHECK only for the last
> partition. If any unexpected thing happen, we can return to the original table
> and redo the tuple routing without using the cached index.
> What do you think ?
Where are you thinking to cache the partidx list? Inside
PartitionDesc or some executor struct?
--
Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-05-27 05:59:55 | Re: Incorrect GUC descriptions in docs and postgresql.conf.sample |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2021-05-27 05:48:02 | Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side |